Originally posted by photoptimist To a crude, first approximation, the difference between shooting SOOC versus RAW is like the difference between shooting slide film versus print film.
With both SOOC and slide film, the image is what the image is after clicking the shutter. All the work goes into picking the settings (or the film) before clicking shutter. What comes out is the final product.*
With both RAW and print film, the photographer's work is only half done after they click the shutter. There's the second half of the process of using all the tools of a digital or physical darkroom for converting the captured image into a final product through a host of adjustments to exposure, contrast, color, highlights, shadows, and retouched features.**
Some say SOOC/slides are a mark of laziness -- real photographers post process. Others say SOOC/slides is a mark of confidence -- real photographers don't need to post process.
Some say RAW/print is the way to get the most out of an image. Others say RAW/print is a miserable chore that takes time away from being outside taking pictures.
All those views are right and it's up to each photographer to pick a strategy that works for them.
Finally, in this digital age, it's easy to pick the RAW+JPG setting of the camera, store both, use the SOOC JPG if you like, and only post-process the RAW if you really feel like it.
*OK, you can post-process SOOC and slides but if you're going to do that it might be better to start with RAW or print film for the increased dynamic range.
*OK, you don't have to post-process RAW or print-film images, automagical settings of the RAW developer or darkroom printer can be used.
Great points Photoptimist, your analogy runs parallel to thoughts I often have. I've photos I wonder if, once learning what the parameters do, could be enhanced of I post processed.
Considering film, it's absolutely spot on about the darkroom being the same as digital post, and I had admittedly forgotten to consider this.
However, would you say the difference in options to manipulate and adjust the modern digital photo is vastly increased over the film era, which moves further away from the images we originally see and try to capture?
---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:04 AM ----------
Originally posted by normhead The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the SOOC image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.
This has been my thoughts so far normhead, it's a matter of time to get any meaningful improvements over the edits the camera makes as it captures.
---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:06 AM ----------
Originally posted by normhead The last time I shot an image in raw+ jpeg, the SOOC image took 40 minutes to get "just as good". And for the SOOC images, the camera did things my software can't do. My guess is you have to be pretty good to match the SOOC images.
This has been my thoughts so far normhead, it's a matter of time to get any meaningful improvements over the edits the camera makes as it captures.
---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:13 AM ----------
Apologies all, trying to reply from my phone and it's double quoted my reply to normhead 😅.
---------- Post added 02-27-21 at 03:15 AM ----------
Originally posted by siva.ss.kumar The title seem to use pariah as derogatory/negative sense. Better to be avoided.
Just FYI. This is considered politically incorrect in my region. It’s like using n-word in USA.
Thanks for that information, I'm not religious and from the UK, so I apologise, I didn't mean any offense, if I can edit the title I'll sort it, I'd not I'll ask a mod.